M14 Forum

jim-analog

Greetings,

There was a multiple page discussion trying to locate and define the line between these two actions on arfcom a few weeks ago. Curious to get opinions from our more enlightened crew on this. Think about the many different scenarios where this could be important and where the dividing line may not be quite so clear cut. I'll hold my comments for a while and listen up to everyone else.

Regards, Jim

Philz M1A

I think that there are so many factors related to this, you could "what if" it for days. My hope is to prepare well enough so that I will not have to face a situation like that. If for some unforeseen reason I did not have enough supplies to sustain or protect my family, I would certainly pursue other courses of action like joining a community, bartering, scavenging or offering my services (labor/security) in exchange for food and water.

Scavenging to me depends on the circumstances of course, and common sense plays into it. Finding cans of food, supplies or loose ammo in the trash or in what appears to be an abandoned car or house is fair game. Finding it in someone's basement while they are gone is probably not a good idea. However I will tell you that in a vacuum, if the deck was simply stacked against me and my family in every way, and all of those other courses of action had failed to produce results...I would have zero issue with doing whatever it took to ensure our survival.

GARRARD

I think the line is reasonable expectation of ownership. Like Philz said, if you take something from someone while they are away when you would have had to use force if they were there, that's looting. If you come across some stuff from a place that has been abandoned, that's scavenging.

LemmyCaution

1: We don't live in a vacuum. We live in reality, which contains others, which necessitates having morals and a social contract that is intrinsic, not a matter of convenience or expedience.

2: I read what you have written here and the question that immediately leaps to mind is "Given that this person has outright said he will kill me and take my property if his own survival plan doesn't pan out, what moral qualm should I have about making sure he never has that opportunity?"

CAVman

I have thought about this issue several times when a SHTF topic was being discussed...
Like many/most things in life, it's all about 'Line Drawing'..
I do remember in Vietnam...a guy's field gear could get divvied up pretty darn quick if he was KIA. No waiting for 'instructions'.
A finer line was drawn if a guy was WIA. Actual discussions over whether he was likely to be able to come back to the unit or not.
All of that was done by Good Guys, trying to figure out if it was the 'right' thing to do, or the 'wrong' thing...
'Right' was adding to the units ammo/food/water/gear...
'Wrong' was risking the guy having to Pay For Lost Gear!
(And that didn't happen much at all)
But then I saw how 'Garrison Units' functioned much less Honorably!
Stealing from each other! Every Man For Himself! No UNIT Cohesion!
If a guy went home on a Red Cross 'Compassionate Leave'...sometimes it was just assumed he would not be returning to the unit...so, if he DID come back, sometimes it was to an empty foot and wall locker!
Bottom Line: Some will KEEP morals and ethics almost anywhere.
Some will LOSE morals and ethics at the first opportunity.

CAVman in WYoming

Philz M1A

1: I said vacuum to compliment my first statement, that being you could go through "what if" scenarios for pages and pages on here through various stages of SHTF, degradation of society etc etc etc. Hence, I used the vacuum term to describe my general mindset, that being that I would explore every possible option at my disposal to survive while doing my utmost to still maintain some semblance of "doing the right thing." However if all of those still yielded no results (highly unlikely) there is simply no way I am going to look my family in the eyes and say: "well we tried our best and failed so I guess now it's time to lay down and die."

2: You immediately jumped to the worst case scenario, which is typical. "By any means necessary" doesn't always mean guns blazing to kill other people. But (and here we go with the what if's) when pushed to the limit who knows, would I steal a few chickens, or poach a deer on someone's land, or cross an boundary to fill up containers of water...? Maybe. These are things I would initially try to avoid at any cost, and things I consider "stealing" or "looting." But desperate people do desperate things.

All I can offer you is this advice, you do whatever you feel is within your morals and comfort zone...and I will do the same. Hopefully we never have to really find out how it will all play out. It's very easy to sit on our high horses and say what we would and would not do, but let your family begin to starve....have your supplies wiped out...and then see what you are willing to do.

LemmyCaution

1: You're arguing that it's OK to steal something belonging to another that they need to survive, possibly resulting in the death of that other, rather than to die with dignity having not caused the deaths of others. You're arguing that you come first and will do 'whatever it takes'- you and yours first, regardless of whether others get killed. This is a fundamentally amoral position.

2: In light of that open admission, is it immoral to kill you preemptively as a matter of self-defense, if we are to agree that self-defense against the aggression of others is a moral position?

huntinghawk

If an item is abandoned you are scavenging. If owned you are looting.

If you might have a chance of being shot at, you are probably looting.

Easy example is getting auto parts like battery or alternator. You try to get those from a vehicle in someone's driveway its looting. Vehicle dead along side of the road it scavenging.

JMO,
HH

Sweets

I probably shouldn't try to introduce levity on a very dark topic but....

How about saying that if you get shot while 'scavaging', it was looting?

Seriously, scavaging is taking from the dead or otherwise departed. Looting is taking from the living.

CAVman

Does the engine have to be Cold first?



CAVman in WYoming

BrokenVet

Concur

Philz M1A

So in an NFL game, if someone fumbles the ball and the other team picks it up, that's scavenging. If the defense strips the ball from the running back while he is running, that's looting.

You could say I just scavenged this ice cold beer that I'm drinking from the fridge.

m14forme

Depends on the scenario, but this is as good as I could come up with.
Thanks HH
Seems like basic common sense and thinking about others ownership rights first would take care of any questions. In a SHTF secenario, the only way to ever have a chance of regaining what was lost, or rebuilding society, would be for large groups of people to maintain personal morals and ethics, and respect for human life and personal property.
Maybe add that abandoned means the person who had prior ownership has given up his rights to the item in question, and is not likely to be seeking to reaquire same within a reasonable time.

Wayne M

IF that time ever comes I suspect you won't find yourself with such a difficult decision.

dozier

I agree with hawk, if you are taking something from a person/family that has obvious ownership, you are stealing. I don't like a thief. In my book, given a SHTF situation, you are threatening my possessions that I have preparred for. Scavenging is one thing, but outright stealing, calls for extreme measures. Most of us here should be a step ahead of the masses. We should be ahead of the game, so plan ahead. dozier